German philosopher Georg Hegel (1770-1831) hypothesized that history unfolds
through dialectical processes of thesis, antithesis, synthesis. Karl Marx
(1818-1883) adapted Hegel’s dialectical philosophy to the Communist
Manifesto of agitating the masses toward world revolution. But alas for
Marx and his successors the proletariat did not revolt against the
bourgeoisie as planned when they witnessed the brutality and carnage of
Communism; therefore a different strategy was needed to overthrow Western
Civilization. In 1923, the Communist International funded a group of Jewish
intellectuals to set up the Institute of Social Science at Frankfurt am
Main—where also the Jewish banking family, the House of Rothschild, had long
been established.

“The early beginnings of the
Frankfurt School emphasised the reformulation of Marxism. The Marxist
proletariat revolution was not going according to plan, as signified by
World War I (the working classes, rather than aligning with their class,
gave preference to their nations and fought each other), and by the
socialist regimes under Lenin, Trotsky, and Stalin in Russia spawned by the
1917 Bolshevik revolution. Marxist intellectuals gathered in the Weimar
Republic to discuss why the revolution had not taken place in Europe, and
returned to the drawing board to perform a ‘searching reexamination of the
very foundations of Marxist theory with the dual hope of explaining past
errors and preparing for future action.’ The Frankfurt School was explicitly
created to do this research and planning ‘to become a major force in the
revitalization of Western European Marxism in the postwar years.’

“As they reworked Marxist theories they
developed a new strain of Marxism that gave priority to the radical
transformation of the cultural superstructure (foundations) of Western
civilization. They perceived Christianity and Western cultural traditions as
obstacles to the revolution, which needed to be severed at their roots. This
Marxist ideology came to be called cultural Marxism, a non-violent
but revolutionary collectivist ideology that seeks the gradual gain of power
via the modification of laws, institutions, and social organisations.

“Other than [Karl
Korsch (1886-1961)], there were three European Marxist theorists who
had a significant impact on Frankfurt School cultural Marxism: in the
initial founding stages, Georg Lukács (1885-1971), and in the later stages,
Antonio Gramsci (1891-1937) and Herbert Marcuse (1898-1979), whose writings
were particularly influential in the 1960s, especially on the
British-created Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies, or the Birmingham
School (1964) and the counter-culture movement and the New Left.

“While he was Deputy Commissar Lukács sought
to destroy society along with the traditional values of the West, writing:
‘I saw the revolutionary destruction of society as the one and only
solution,’ and:’ ‘A worldwide overturning of values cannot take place
without the annihilation of the old values and the creation of new ones by
the revolutionaries.’ His methods became known as cultural terrorism. One of these methods to undermine traditional Western culture was the
introduction of a radical sex education program;
‘special lectures and supportive literature were developed to instruct
Hungarian children’ about free love and sexual intercourse, to repudiate
middle class family codes of monogamy, and ‘to deride and ignore the
authority of parental authority, and precepts of traditional morality.’ In
addition, the promiscuity and rebellion of women against patriarchy was
promoted.

“Lukács participated in the 1922 Marxist
work week in Thuringia, and thus helped found the Frankfurt School. In 1923
he published History and Class Consciousness, the same year that
Korsch published his Marxism and Philosophy. Lukács argued that the
Christian cultural institutions of the West were oppressive, intolerant, and
had ‘blinded’ people ‘to their true class interests’ (Bill Lind, The
Origins of Political Correctness).
He wanted to destroy the cultural institutions of the West so that power
would ‘fall into their laps like ripened fruit’ and the Communist state
could be created.15

“Lukács also influenced the Frankfurt School
development of Critical Theory.”

Thus, the founding Marxists of the
Frankfurt Institute set out to destroy the traditional values of Western
civilization by declaring war on the family: “…the introduction of a radical
sex education program; ‘special lectures and
supportive literature were developed to instruct Hungarian children’ about
free love and sexual intercourse, to repudiate middle class family codes of
monogamy, and ‘to deride and ignore the authority of parental authority, and
precepts of traditional morality.’ In addition, the promiscuity and
rebellion of women against patriarchy was promoted.” In Hungary, however,
Georg Lukacs’ sexual revolution was aborted by Roman Catholics whose
“bishops asked the community not to follow the world. Not to cooperate with
the communists.” (Dr.
Anca-Maria Cernea)

“Lukacs was well-suited to the
Comintern task: he had been one of the Commissars of Culture during the
short-lived Hungarian Soviet in Budapest in 1919; in fact,
modern historians link the shortness of the Budapest experiment to Lukacs’
orders mandating sex education in the schools, easy access to contraception,
and the loosening of divorce laws—all of which revulsed Hungary’s Roman
Catholic population.” (The
Frankfurt School: Bolshevik Intelligentsia)

“In 1918, a man named György Lukács became the
minister of culture in the short-lived Communist government of Béla Kun in
Hungary. Being of the opinion that Marxist theory could only be implemented
where the family unit and sexual morals were broken down, Lukács implemented
a bold program of social reform that mandated sex education in schools. The
Hungarian people were horrified by this outrage, as well as other aspects of
the Kun regime, and this Marxist government of Hungary lasted only about 180
days. Sadly, 1949 would bring a much longer lasting Communist regime…” (Cultural
Marxism Versus The Church)

In 1933, the Frankfurt Marxist Jews fled Nazi
Germany and were welcomed by the U.S. There they set up shop at Columbia
University and proceeded to apply their “critical theory” to American
culture.

“The Frankfurt School, also known as the
Institute of Social Research (Institut für Sozialforschung), is a
social and political philosophical movement of thought located in Frankfurt
am Main, Germany. It is the original source of what is known asCritical
Theory. The Institute was founded, thanks to
a donation by Felix Weil in 1923, with the aim of developing Marxist studies
in Germany. The Institute eventually generated a specific school of thought
after 1933 when the Nazis forced it to close and move to the United States,
where it found hospitality at Columbia University, New York.

“The academic influence of the ‘critical’ method
is far reaching in terms of educational institutions in which such tradition
is taught and in terms of the problems it addresses. Some of its core issues
involve the critique of modernities and of capitalist society, the
definition of social emancipation and the perceived pathologies of society.
Critical theory provides a specific interpretation of Marxist philosophy and
reinterprets some of its central economic and political notions such as
commodification, reification, fetishization and critique of mass culture…”

“Perhaps you’ve wondered why so many college professors are so left-wing.
In your freshman year, you might have noted with dread—as I did—some of your
fellow students ‘going with the flow’ and molding their beliefs to fit in.
Perhaps one of them was you, before you grew up and snapped out of it! The
Frankfurt School is the answer to why so many universities are
Social
Justice Warrior
factories.

The
origins of the Frankfurt School

“They
found themselves unwelcome in Germany during the 1930s, and one of the two
reasons was that all of them were Communists. They moved to the USA,
settling down in Columbia University. How did they repay the country that
gave them refuge? Bysubverting it,
of
course. If all this sounds like McCarthyist alarmism, note that theCommunists themselvesclaim
them.

“Because the proletariat just wasn’t interested in revolution, they
rebranded Communism, taking out the elements of class struggle, and adding
contributions from Freudian theory. This was a mistake; Communism
emphasized hard work and heroism; that much is respectable even if the rest
of the ideology is badly flawed…”

Note:
Marx and Engels also mocked homosexuality; Stalin and Castro criminalized
sodomy. Today, however, Mariela Castro, the daughter of Raul Castro
and a member of Parliament, is leading the LGBT movement which is supported
by the Cuban government.

“They
had two strategies: ensconcing themselves into academia, and the criticism
of society (hence ‘critical theory’). Ultimately, this meant ideological
subversion and basically badgering society to death. (It seems incredible
that they did so much without picking up a single rifle.) They stressed
moral
relativism and
the ‘question everything’ atmosphere that became the 1960s counterculture
zeitgeist. A few of their books, such as Eros and Civilization by
Herbert Marcuse and The Authoritarian Personality by Theodor Adorno,
have become classics in academia.

“Many
of their students graduated and became professors elsewhere, just in time
for the 1960s. Young people are at the most impressionable time of their
lives, so indoctrinating college students was a very effective strategy.
It’s little wonder that campuses became hotbeds of student activism!
College draft deferments surely helped them reach more students sympathetic
to their message.

“Further, the ideological seeds of the Frankfurt School—along with the
Communist Party USA—fell onto fertile ground. There were several groups
that they—cultural Marxists and garden variety Communists—infiltrated and
subverted, for instance:

“There
was already a feminist movement, mostly
moderate and mostly simply about equal rights (a goal which was nearly
complete by then). Under leftist influence,
second
wave feminismbegan,
which was anything but moderate and effectively about deconstructing
society.

“There
was already a beatnik counterculture. With
a little encouragement, this became a much larger youth counterculture, the
hippies. Having a significant toehold in academia put the Critical Theory
folks in a very good position to influence the young Baby Boomers.

“There
was already a civil rights movement, which
the Communists had put a lot of effort into influencing. This included
figures such as W.E.B. DuBois, Paul Robeson, Stanley Levison (MLK’s top
advisor), and Frank Marshall Davis (called ‘Pops’ in Obama’s autobiography).

“The
gay movement was heavily influenced in the
beginning by the Mattachine Society, founded by Harry Hay, of which most members
were Communists.”

The
Cultural Marxists were also ensconced in the churches, notably the United
Methodist Church which was on the vanguard of promoting Gay Liberation.
Their publication, motive Magazine, was circulated from 1941 to 1972.
It was pro Gay and pro-Communist. The
final
issue of motive looks and sounds every bit like
publications of the LGBTQ today.

“motive (always spelled with a lowercase ‘m’) was the official magazine for
the Methodist Student Movement from its founding in 1941 and, for a few
years at the end of its life, for the entire University Christian Movement (UCM).
Much celebrated even at the time for its avant garde editorial and artistic
vision, in 1966 Time magazine said it stood out among church publications
‘like a miniskirt at a church social.’ It was the single runner-up to Life
as Magazine of the Year in 1965. Ultimately, its strong stands on civil
rights, Vietnam, and emerging gender issues became more than the Methodist
Church officials could take. The magazine ceased publication in 1972. Even
so, an entire generation of religious activists were shaped by its vision.”

That
generation of activists included Hillary Rodham Clinton who now aspires to
become a Methodist minister.

“A new
Washington Post story about Hillary Clinton’s time as Secretary of State
describes her as ‘a wonky Methodist who believes she is supposed to make
good things happen.’” Clinton has in the past credited motive magazine
as an important formative influence.” (Hillary
Clinton: Methodist)

“Earlier I had assumed that the Frankfurt School was an independent movement,
with no particular encouragement or guidance from the USSR. Actually, it’s
a little more complicated than that.
Franz Leopold Neumann, identified by the
Venona decrypts as a Soviet spy, was in contact with leading figures Max
Horkheimer, Theodor Adorno, and also the spy Hede Massing, the wife of Paul
Massing (another Frankfurt school figure). Later, he became a professor at
Columbia University…

“…KGB
defector, Yuri Bezmenovnoted
that only 15% of the KGB’s efforts were spying; the other 85% went into
ideological subversion; this is what he was assigned to do in India, until
he got disgusted with it and escaped. He explained,

“‘It’s
a great brainwashing process, which goes very slow[ly] and is divided [into]
four basic stages. The first one [is] demoralization; it takes from 15-20
years to demoralize a nation. Why that many years? Because this is the
minimum number of years which [is required] to educate one generation of
students in the country of your enemy, exposed to the ideology of the enemy.
In other words, Marxist-Leninist ideology is being pumped into the soft
heads of at least three generations of American students, without being
challenged, or counter-balanced by the basic values of Americanism (American
patriotism).

“The
result? The result you can see. Most of the people who graduated in the
sixties (drop-outs or half-baked intellectuals) are now occupying the
positions of power in the government, civil service, business, mass media,
[and the] educational system. You are stuck with them. You cannot get rid of
them. They are contaminated; they are programmed to think and react to
certain stimuli in a certain pattern. You cannot change their mind[s], even
if you expose them to authentic information, even if you prove that white is
white and black is black, you still cannot change the basic perception and
the logic of behavior. In other words, these people… the process of
demoralization is complete and irreversible. To [rid] society of these
people, you need another twenty or fifteen years to educate a new generation
of patriotically-minded and common sense people, who would be acting in
favor and in the interests of United States society.’

Memetic warfare

“Even
though the Soviet Union fell apart twenty five years ago, the memes they
launched are still out there. Many of the students the Frankfurt School
taught became teachers and professors, who taught another batch of teachers
and professors, and they’re now indoctrinating our youth. Some others
became ensconced in the media or in government positions. This is what
Italian Communist theoretician Antonio Gramsci called ‘the
long march through the institutions.’ Only a fraction identifies with
Communism, but they still practice the party line even if few are aware of
where their views originated.

“If
you’ve ever wondered where all of today’s Social
Justice Warriors
came from, now you know the story.”

The
Cultural Marxists’ “long march through the institutions” has encountered
little opposition as it marches through the Christian Church—which
the Italian Communist, Antonio Gramsci, recognized was the foundation of
Western Civilization and the foremost obstacle to Marxist revolution.

“Gramsci’s signal contribution was to liberate the Marxist project from the
prison of economic dogma, thereby dramatically enhancing its ability to
subvert Christian society… The civilized world, Gramsci deduced, had been
thoroughly saturated with Christianity for 2,000 years and Christianity
remains the dominant philosophical and moral system in Europe and North
America. Practically speaking, civilization and Christianity were
inextricably bound together. Christianity had become so thoroughly
integrated into the daily lives of nearly everyone, including non-Christians
living in Christian lands, it was so pervasive, that it formed an almost
impenetrable barrier to the new, revolutionary civilization Marxists wish to
create. Attempting to batter down that barrier proved unproductive, since it
only generated powerful counter-revolutionary forces, consolidating them and
making them potentially deadly. Therefore, in place of the frontal attack,
how much more advantageous and less hazardous it would be to attack the
enemy’s society subtly, with the aim of transforming the society’s
collective mind gradually, over a period of a few generations, from its
former Christian worldview into one more harmonious to Marxism.” (Gramsci’s
Grand Plan)

Reformed Pastor Bret McAtee has written many short but informative articles
exposing the ideology of Marxism / Cultural Marxismand its subversion of the Christian Church and Western culture. In the
following essay,
Pastor McAtee identifies the main tactics employed by cultural Marxists to
subvert Christianity.

“The small and powerless minorities which struggle against the false
consciousness and its beneficiaries must be helped. Their continued
existence is more important than the preservation of abused rights and
liberties which grant constitutional power to those who oppress these
minorities.” Herbert Marcuse, The Frankfurt School

“This ‘false consciousness,’ which one of the truly great Cultural Marxists
railed against was the consciousness which has been shaped and formed by
thousands of years of Christianity upon the West. It was this ‘false
consciousness’ that Marcuse and his cohorts at the Frankfurt School desired
to overthrow and so the oppressed must be protected from this ‘false
consciousness’ even if it meant denying the proper protection of law to
those who were [designated] as the ‘oppressors.’ In this quote Marcuse is
styling his worldview and beliefs as the true consciousness vis-a-vis the
false consciousness that he and his ideological soul mates were waging
civilizational war against.

“This
false consciousness would be overthrown by use of the tool-kit developed by
the Cultural Marxists. These tools came to be known as,

Critical theory

“In
Cultural Marxism via the work of critical theory, every aspect of a person’s
identity is to be questioned, be it gender, sexual orientation, family,
race, culture, religion, in order to benefit supposedly oppressed groups. By
deconstructing heretofore stable and unchanging identity social categories
(part of the false consciousness problem) those who were part of moral,
ethnic, racial, and religious minority groups could pull down and destroy
the whole idea of norms that arise in cultures that are comprised of
distinct majorities.

“The
underlying and enduring aspect of critical theory common to all its
multitudinous expressions is the creation and application of
interdisciplinary theories growing out of a worldview dedicated to
overturning the false consciousness of traditional Christian thought and
social order and so serving as an instrument of social transformation.
Critical theory comes in all shapes, sizes, and expressions but the one
thing it has in common is criticizing any residual influence of Christianity
that remains on any and all of our Western institutions and disciplines. It
typically expresses itself as the voice of the oppressed and the aggrieved
and in doing so seeks to employ ‘social justice’ and ‘fairness’ as the sting
within the theory. However, in order to do so Critical theory must invert
and redefine almost all realities in order to be able to secure the superior
position of the oppressed.

The
New Proletariat

“The
Cultural Marxists empirically observed that Marxism, in its classical
expression, failed when it posited that there was automatic friction between
the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. Because of this observation, the
Cultural Marxists understood that if the West was going to be a cake turned
then what was required was the creation of both a new model and a new
proletariat that would serve the purpose of providing the necessary friction
and manpower in order to achieve Marxist transformation.

“The
Cultural Marxists finally conceived of both new model and new proletariat
when it changed the old class model of have vs. have not to the new model of
oppressor vs. oppressed. The oppressed was thus to the agenda of Cultural
Marxism what the working class proletariat was to the agenda of Classical
Marxism. Just as in Classical Marxism there remained the sense of grievance
in this new proletariat but instead of the grievance being based on an
economic pivot Cultural Marxism chose the pivot of the unprivileged
oppressed outcast as the tool by which to achieve social transformation in a
Marxist direction. Having chosen that pivot it then worked to propagandize a
large number of groups that they were both oppressed and that their identity
as humans should be tied up with their oppression.

“Concretely speaking, the new Cultural Marxist proletariat — those who would
do the yeoman work of the cultural Marxist march through the Institutions —
would be comprised of all who would believe the critical theory propaganda
that they were underprivileged and oppressed. Those successfully
propagandized and recruited were feminists, ethnic
minorities, and the sexually deviant. These were the new proletariat
oppressed and they would fight against the new bourgeoisie who were cast as
the oppressors. The new bourgeoisie were cast as Christian patriarchy,
Heterosexual Married, the white majority (especially white males), people
who insist that gender is binary (CIS-gender), and most emphatically
Christians who rejected this Cultural Marxist social construct template.
Ironically the new social construct that the cultural Marxist created used
as one of its chief tools for social transformation the idea that previous
normativity itself was merely social construct. In the cultural Marxist
world, the oppressors were successful as oppressors because they had managed
to force their social constructs on the oppressed. The work of the critical
theory was to expose these putative social constructs for what they were.

Shaming

“In
order of this to happen then, the previous normativity must be shamed and
countered by the recruitment and so rise of a new normativity. For example,
heterosexual marriage must be challenged by other forms of sexuality as
mainstreamed into the social order. For example, since whites are oppressor
then new slogans like ‘diversity is our strength,’ as combined with
immigration policies which will decrease the overall percentage total of
whites must be pursued. For example, if patriarchy is oppressive then
matriarchy and anarchy is the solution. For example, if CIS-gender is merely
a dominant social construct then transgenderism must be injected into the
blood stream of the West. For example if Christianity is oppressive then a
two pronged approach must be employed. First,
Christianity must be emptied of its previous content and filled with the
ideology of Cultural Marxism as its new content and second, those
Christians who refuse to be re-programmed must be marginalized and diluted
by bringing in teeming numbers of Muslim immigrants.

“The
ground for all this was set by Theodore Adorno’s book ‘The Authoritarian
Personality,’ wherein Adorno patholigizes what had always been considered
normative. By the time Adorno is finished patriarchy, patriotism,
familialism, and the Christian faith are all given the bum’s rush and
characterized as signs of sickness. Of course the consequence of this, if
taken seriously, is a social order that is rootless, international,
alienated, and godless. These are the very characteristics which are
descriptive of the West as a result of the canker that is cultural Marxism.

“The
ground being set, the Cultural Marxist advance is made by use of the
technique of shaming. Shaming occurs when labels are affixed to people for
perfectly normal behavior. For example, if one is white and desirous of
living in a homogeneous neighborhood or attend a homogeneous church one is
shamed with catcalls of ‘racist,’ or ‘Islamaphobe,’ or ‘homophobe,’ or
‘Un-Christian.’ However when large influxes of differing people groups are
relocated into Western cities (Lewiston, Maine comes to mind) with the
natural result that these groups create their own sub-culture where
homogeneity is characteristic this is called the benefit of
multiculturalism. Shaming is saved for the majority White Christian.
Normativity is reserved for the alien and the stranger.

Political Correctness

“A
further tool for the advance of Cultural Marxism is the tool of Political
correctness. Political correctness has many expressions but we will consider
its use as a tool of thought control by way of linguistic manipulation.
Political correctness controls thought by creating taboos in speech usage as
enforced via social stigmatization. Words that cannot be said become words
that will not be thought. This thought control is ubiquitous on American
campuses today as riots ensure when certain speech is to be expressed. The
recent riots on University campuses against Charles Murray and before him
Milo Yiannopoulos provide proof.

“This
thought control is also achieved by seeking to control the language by
scandalizing language that does not serve the purposes of the Cultural
Marxist. Examples of this abound. Most recently the phrase ‘anchor baby’
created a firestorm. The Cultural Marxists insisted that this was a
pejorative. However, it is only a pejorative if you assume their worldview.
By insisting that this phrase dare not be uttered the Cultural Marxists were
advancing their agenda and their worldview. Instead they began to insist
that the phrased, ‘citizen children of unauthorized immigrants’ be used in
its place. But of course, the very issue up for debate is whether such
children should be citizens. By using their language they win the debate.
Another example is ‘illegal immigrant.’ Despite the fact that those
immigrants which are here illegally are indeed, by definition, ‘illegal
immigrants,’ the Cultural Marxists demand that these people be referred to
as ‘undocumented workers.’ Such language advances their worldview and
agenda. Control the language, control the thinking. Control the language and
the thinking control the outcome. One more example will suffice. What we
today call ‘affirmative action,’ is the triumph of political correctness.
‘Affirmative action,’ is in reality ethnic discrimination but many can’t see
that because of the thought control achieved by our cultural mind masters.

“In
the end Cultural Marxism as an ideology has as a goal the elimination of all
stigmatization except the stigmatization of those who believe that
stigmatism has a proper and necessary role in any social order. In the
Cultural Marxist world oppressed and oppressor categories will eliminated
with the consequence that stigma will be ended. The pedophile and tranny
will be just as normal as the heterosexual and the Christian. In reality
what will happen is that God’s normal will be stigmatized and maybe even
criminalized.”

These summaries of the history, agenda and
tactics of Cultural Marxism are presented as an introduction to the
following expose of the agents and strategies that Cultural Marxists within
the Christian community are employing to subvert Christianity. The cultural
Marxists who are invading the Church are not the strident Social Justice
Warriors of the radical Left, but are a fifth column peacefully infiltrating
the Church to destroy it from within. This expose will hopefully equip
Christians to identify cultural Marxist infiltrators and recognize their
tactics. Already, prominent church leaders, instead of upholding sound
doctrine and protecting the Church, are promoting those who teach the
Cultural Marxist doctrines of demons and heap criticism on Christians
for having the mind of Christ regarding sexual perversion. Meanwhile, these
same church leaders meet secretly with gay rights organizations which are
demanding that Christian denominations remove homosexuality from their “sin
list” and welcome sodomites into their membership.

The hour is late and the need is urgent for
Christians to discern the spirits, whether they be of God, and to contend
earnestly for the faith that was once delivered to the Saints.

“Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common
salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you
that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto
the saints. For there are certain men crept in
unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation,
ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into
lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus
Christ.” Jude 1:3-4

“Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the
spirits whether they are of God: because
many false prophets are gone out into the world.” 1 John 4:1